Boba Fett died as far as the movie was concerned, no? I know he escaped by using his blaster and that he's technically alive in the Star Wars canon, but to a random person watching ROTJ, he's dead. I think. Technicalities.

As much as I enjoyed the rest of the movie, I was very disappointed by the Red Skull's death in "Captain America." The Cap didn't actually do anything to defeat him. He just picked up the Energon Cube and evaporated! Lame.

I wouldn't have put Wash on that list. They mentioned themselves that even though nothing was gained by it, it *works* for that movie.

And I had guessed that Sam Jackson's character from Deep Blue Sea would be on that list before I read it!

As for Trek, I'd put Marcus on there, because it didn't really seem to affect anyone.

Click to expand...

I think Wash's death worked GREAT for that movie, but we're used to deaths of main characters being grand and drawn out, last words, several minutes of air time, etc. That didn't happen with Wash. I'd say that makes it anti-climactic. But I don't want to confuse anti-climactic with irrelevant or "not good"--that was one of the more powerful deaths I've seen on screen in a long time precisely because it was anti-climactic. Just my opinion.

As for Marcus, I assume you mean David Marcus, Kirk's kid, right? Yeah, nobody cared.

Why is Samuel L. Jackson's death in Deep Blue Sea considered anti-climatic. I thought it was shocking and completely unexpected. It seemed like he was the main hero of the movie and then bam! He's dead and gone. I loved it. In fact it was the best and most clever part of that turkey of a film.

Why is Samuel L. Jackson's death in Deep Blue Sea considered anti-climatic. I thought it was shocking and completely unexpected. It seemed like he was the main hero of the movie and then bam! He's dead and gone. I loved it. In fact it was the best and most clever part of that turkey of a film.

Click to expand...

Yeah, that scene was the only redeeming factor of an otherwise garbage movie. Total shock and not anti-climactic at all. Who got a better death? The guy thrown into glass by the shark? Helicopter crash people? The woman who got bit in the crotch? Really bad CGI main character death at the end?

Count Dukuu in Revenge of the Sith. Yoda couldn't even beat him in AOTC yet Anikin can easily do it in the third. Yeah so he turns into Darth Vader, but still.

Click to expand...

Yoda was in Tasmanian Devil mode and dominating the dojo after about only twenty seconds of fighting, which is why Dooku had to go for the diversion of toppling the tower thingie on Obi-Wan and Anakin. Sadly Obi-Wan, despite being conscious and seeing what was going on, couldn't overcome the pain of his minor little boo-boos and levitate the thing on his own, thus allowing Dooku to escape.

Boba Fett died as far as the movie was concerned, no? I know he escaped by using his blaster and that he's technically alive in the Star Wars canon, but to a random person watching ROTJ, he's dead. I think. Technicalities.

Click to expand...

Well, since the Sarlacc takes a thousand years to digest someone , technically it's right - Boba wouldn't die until a millennium after that movie takes place.

Why is Samuel L. Jackson's death in Deep Blue Sea considered anti-climatic. I thought it was shocking and completely unexpected. It seemed like he was the main hero of the movie and then bam! He's dead and gone. I loved it. In fact it was the best and most clever part of that turkey of a film.

Click to expand...

I gave two definitions at the front of the post. This fits the second one: "trivial or commonplace concluding a series of significant events." The whole movie is fantasy up until the shark eats the guy, which is trivial--of course the shark eats the guy. The difference with Deep Blue Sea is exactly what you said--it was so obvious and we are so used to movies forgoing the obvious to bring us fantastic situations that when the obvious occurs we can't help but be shocked and surprised! The movie stunk, but this was by far the best moment and you absolutely nailed. Anti-climactic doesn't mean bad or boring!

Boba Fett died as far as the movie was concerned, no? I know he escaped by using his blaster and that he's technically alive in the Star Wars canon, but to a random person watching ROTJ, he's dead. I think. Technicalities.

Click to expand...

Well, since the Sarlacc takes a thousand years to digest someone , technically it's right - Boba wouldn't die until a millennium after that movie takes place.

Boba Fett died as far as the movie was concerned, no? I know he escaped by using his blaster and that he's technically alive in the Star Wars canon, but to a random person watching ROTJ, he's dead. I think. Technicalities.

Click to expand...

Well, since the Sarlacc takes a thousand years to digest someone , technically it's right - Boba wouldn't die until a millennium after that movie takes place.

^ Given that the Sarlacc takes a thousand years to digest its prey, I can only assume it keeps that prey alive for that long. Otherwise the prey would die and rot. And Threepio did specifically say that the victim(s) would remain alive all that time.

^ Given that the Sarlacc takes a thousand years to digest its prey, I can only assume it keeps that prey alive for that long. Otherwise the prey would die and rot. And Threepio did specifically say that the victim(s) would remain alive all that time.

^ Apparently so. Otherwise the "slowly digested over a thousand years" would be irrelevant to the victims. Given that Threepio uses this line to scare people about to be fed into the Sarlacc, then it must logically keep them alive that long, otherwise the threat would be meaningless.

The Star Wars wiki also says that the Sarlacc keeps victims alive all the time it digests them. Doesn't say why or how it does this, only that it does.

^ Given that the Sarlacc takes a thousand years to digest its prey, I can only assume it keeps that prey alive for that long. Otherwise the prey would die and rot. And Threepio did specifically say that the victim(s) would remain alive all that time.

Click to expand...

So it preserves its victims while also digesting them?

Click to expand...

The Sarlacc absorbs the minds of its victims. It's stated in a very excellent short story about Boba Fett.

^ Given that the Sarlacc takes a thousand years to digest its prey, I can only assume it keeps that prey alive for that long. Otherwise the prey would die and rot. And Threepio did specifically say that the victim(s) would remain alive all that time.

Click to expand...

So it preserves its victims while also digesting them?

Click to expand...

The Sarlacc absorbs the minds of its victims. It's stated in a very excellent short story about Boba Fett.

^ Given that the Sarlacc takes a thousand years to digest its prey, I can only assume it keeps that prey alive for that long. Otherwise the prey would die and rot. And Threepio did specifically say that the victim(s) would remain alive all that time.

Click to expand...

So it preserves its victims while also digesting them?

Click to expand...

Of course, this makes not the slightest bit of sense if you think about it for two seconds, unless Sarlaccs have some other form of sustenance besides (very, very slowly) digesting preserved victims.